Does it support ActivityPub? Bookwyrm does. That seems to me to be a basic requirement for a social network at this point.
I've been looking into neodb, have you compared them?
https://neodb.net/
Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
111–120 of 214 posts
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#112I just use Librarything. The web site has more features than any other tool out there, and the community and admins are better. Plus, it's completely free. I've been using it since 2007, and can't say I've ever had a bad experience.
Indeed. Except for the UI, it has most of the features OP wanted since at least 2011.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#113I dream of a good recommendation system because Goodreads is completely terrible. I just want to know two things: which books are similar and which books I would like, beyond typical recommendations. Something akin to what platforms like VOD, YouTube, and Netflix offer. For me, this is the most important killer feature.
We’ll definitely have this at some point. A good recommendation system needs a solid base of user data, so it’s only possible once we have a larger user base. I really wanted to have this for the launch since it seemed so important for a book tracking platform but we didn't have the data to train models to make recommendations.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#114> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.
> Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book?
I rate for myself, and not others. And for over 20 years I've used a 10 point system.
10 = Easily amongst my favorite
9 = Awesome, but not in all time favorites
8 = Really liked it, and would recommend
7 = Liked it, was worth my time, but not so much that I would happily recommend to others
6 = Liked it, but wasn't worth my time
5 = Neutral
And below 5 I don't distinguish. I randomly pick to indicate I didn't like it.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#115> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.
The 4-star system is indeed wonderful. A rating that is truly "neutral" doesn't exist in a world of human subjectivity
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#116> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.
> Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? I rate for myself, and not others. And for over 20 years I've used a 10 point system. 10 = Easily amongst my favorite 9 = Awesome, but not in all time favorites 8 = Really liked it, and would recommend 7 = Liked it, was worth my time, but not so much that I would happily recommend to others 6 = Liked it, but wasn't worth…
It kind of seems like you use a five-point system, then?
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#117> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.
Having worked on a rating system, I think 10 levels are useful (or 5 levels with half-stars). You can create better averages/recs using 10 levels, since ratings of 0 or 10, which are often spammy, can be down-weighed.
I can absolutely understand that it makes sense to have a much more fine-grained average, but personally I struggle to give meaningful ratings beyond the four I mentioned.
That said perhaps multiple binary dimensions would be better. Good story yes/no, interesting/unique premise yes/no, overall good acting yes/no, good cinematography yes/no etc etc.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
0 to 10 is a mess as well because some people give 10s very often and others only give a 10 for the very best things. And of course the bots all rate everything 1 or 10.
I was once playing around with a 3-point ranking system. Think thumbs-down, thumbs-up, and double-thumbs-up. The thumbs up and down would basically function as expected, while the latter would be weighted heavier for the recommendation algorithm. Basically a `recommend me more of this, this is high quality content` action. There is a general problem with a 5 or 10 star voting system, consider a [malicious] user who o…
What you're describing is fully observed in education. The scale of your evaluation has to have an odd total of numbers and a limited number of choices. 1-2-3, for example. That means that each digit sends a strong signal. 1-2-3-4 means the 3 is the non-controversial choice. Average, so to speak, and you don't want average in your evaluation. You need to adequately grade stuff here, and giving most things an average grade is a weak signal that prevents you from differentiating.
When you grade by competency (not by knowledge), you also assign a written description for each grade. That helps a lot. I think those platforms are keenly aware of those facts I just described, and are trying to boil them down to simple actions for users, that impart large signal, and that respect the cultural norms of evaluation. That's why Letterboxd has a 5-star with half-stars rating system, but also has a like button.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#119The best part of Goodreads for me is the communities. You can join a group with monthly book reads, and participate in their forums. Do you have any plans to do something similar?
Sure we do. I'm planning to have reddit-like forums for each book over 500 ratings at the bottom of the page like IMDB used to do. Also, I'm considering forums for genres like romance, fantasy.
Forums per book is a good start, but I find that the groups are a bigger draw in Goodreads. They have a more personal touch and allow you to discuss broader topics and get recommendations from accounts you know and trust. For example I'm in a group called "Evolution of science fiction" and have learnt a lot from joining in their monthly novel / short story reads.
Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative
#120I'm very old for the audience here, but really miss another Amazon acquisition and destruction: CD Now. I use ratings as a discoverability mechanism, and don't need some absolute rating based on unknown foundations as much as linking new content to known content. I find myself re-reading authors every few years because I struggle to find new authors and works that might appeal to my appetite.
There was a a time Jeff Bezos believed he needed to own platforms where people reviewed things, since it would make the Amazon Store better. Then Jeff discovered he could just charge the sellers on his platform for placement. Money talks.
Ever since then, Amazon has cared very little about all the things it bought related to the old strategy.